Jurisprudence Commons^™

Language's Empire: A Counter-Telling Of Administrative Law In Canada, Nicholas Hooper

LLM Theses

This thesis renders the unstated assumptions that animate statutory interpretation in the administrative state. It argues that the current approach is a disingenuous rhetorical overlay that masks the politics of definitional meaning. After rejecting the possibility of structuring principles in our (post)modern oversaturation of signs, the thesis concludes with an aspirational account of interpretive pragmatism in the face of uncertainty.

Pepperdine University School Of Law Legal Summaries, Armando Lopez

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Bait And Switch: Taking Native Species On And Off The List Due To Invasive Species, Connie Mccarthy

Environmental and Earth Law Journal (EELJ)

No abstract provided.

Water Is Life: The Native American Tribal Role In Protecting Natural Resources, Susan M. Larned

Environmental and Earth Law Journal (EELJ)

No abstract provided.

From Land Or From Air: Why A Unified Energy Resource Scheme Is Necessary When The Answer Is Both, J. Brent Marshall

Environmental and Earth Law Journal (EELJ)

No abstract provided.

Rethinking "Imminent Harm" As It Relates To Asian Carp In Lake Michigan And Other Invasive Species, Philip S. Traynor

Environmental and Earth Law Journal (EELJ)

No abstract provided.

When Courts Run Amuck: A Book Review Of Unequal: How America's Courts Undermine Discrimination Law By Sandra F. Sperino And Suja A. Thomas (Oxford 2017), Theresa M. Beiner

Texas A&M Law Review

In Unequal: How America’s Courts Undermine Discrimination Law (“Unequal”), law professors Sandra F. Sperino and Suja A. Thomas provide a point-by-point analysis of how the federal courts’ interpretations of federal anti-discrimination laws have undermined their efficacy to provide relief to workers whose employers have allegedly engaged in discrimination. The cases’ results are consistently pro-employer, even while the Supreme Court of the United States—a court not known for being particularly pro-plaintiff—has occasionally ruled in favor of plaintiff employees. The authors suggest some reasons for this apparent anti-plaintiff bias among the federal courts, although they do not settle on a particular reason …

How Subterranean Regulation Hinders Innovation In Assisted Reproductive Technology, Myrisha S. Lewis

Cardozo Law Review

Most scholars believe assisted reproductive technology is subject only to minimal regulation, especially by the federal government. This belief I contend, is wrong. In this Article, I examine agency documents, statements by officials, and letters that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has sent to physicians and researchers over the past fifteen years to reveal an overlooked regulatory program. The FDA has been targeting new forms of assisted reproductive technology that involve small genetic modifications (advanced assisted reproductive technologies or AARTs) through regulatory actions that receive little public, media, or scholarly attention. I term this method of regulation "subterranean …

Planning For Excellence: Insights From An International Review Of Regulators’ Strategic Plans, Adam M. Finkel, Daniel E. Walters, Angus Corbett

Faculty Scholarship

What constitutes regulatory excellence? Answering this question is an indispensable first step for any public regulatory agency that is measuring, striving towards, and, ultimately, achieving excellence. One useful way to answer this question would be to draw on the broader literature on regulatory design, enforcement, and management. But, perhaps a more authentic way would be to look at how regulators themselves define excellence. However, we actually know remarkably little about how the regulatory officials who are immersed in the task of regulation conceive of their own success.

In this Article, we investigate regulators’ definitions of regulatory excellence by drawing on …

Pepperdine University School Of Law Legal Summaries, Armando Lopez

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Chevron Step Two's Domain, Kent H. Barnett, Christopher J. Walker

Notre Dame Law Review

An increasing number of judges, policymakers, and scholars have advocated eliminating or narrowing Chevron deference—a two-step inquiry under which courts defer to federal agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous statutes the agencies administer. Much of the debate centers on either Chevron’s domain (i.e., when Chevron should apply at all) or how courts ascertain statutory ambiguity at Chevron’s first step. Largely lost in this debate on constraining agency discretion is the role of Chevron’s second step: whether the agency’s resolution of a statutory ambiguity is reasonable. Drawing on the most comprehensive study of Chevron in the circuit courts, this …

Federal Circuit Jurisdiction: Looking Back And Thinking Forward, Timothy B. Dyk

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Critical Race Ip, Anjali Vats, Deidré A. Keller

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Textualism And The Problem Of Scrivener's Error, John David Ohlendorf

Maine Law Review

Scrivener’s errors make easy prey for the gentle comedy of the bench and bar, much in the way that typographical errors in billboards, newspaper headlines, and church bulletins form an endless source of humor for late night talk show hosts. But theorists of legal interpretation have long seen that scrivener’s errors pose a more serious problem. The doctrine surrounding scrivener’s error stands considered as something of a cousin to the absurdity doctrine, which has roots extending to the earliest days of the American Republic. More recently, the post-legal-process revival of formalist approaches to statutory interpretation on the bench, and their …

The Total Takings Myth, Lynn E. Blais

Fordham Law Review

For almost thirty-five years, the U.S. Supreme Court has attempted to carve out a total takings doctrine within its regulatory takings jurisprudence. Most regulatory takings claims are evaluated under the “ad hoc” threefactor test first articulated in Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York. Exceedingly few of these claims are successful. But the Court has identified certain categories of government actions that are compensable takings per se, otherwise known as total takings. This began in 1982 with Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., where the Court held that a land use ordinance requiring a landowner to …

Pepperdine University School Of Law: Legal Summaries, Jane Seo

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

The Earth's Atmosphere As A Global Trust: Establishing Proportionate State Responsibility To Maintain, Restore And Sustain The Global Atmosphere, Thomas Boudreau Ph.D.

Environmental and Earth Law Journal (EELJ)

Expanding upon the important work already accomplished by the Paris Agreement (2015), the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) can help create the international legal framework needed by recognizing, in a nonbinding resolution as a first step, the Earth’s atmosphere as a global trust and thus helping to create the necessary legal capacity- building among nation-states to monitor, maintain as well as restore the Earth’s atmosphere for future generations.

The Dangers Of Water Privatization: An Exploration Of The Discriminatory Practices Of Private Water Companies, Elana Ramos

Environmental and Earth Law Journal (EELJ)

No abstract provided.

Putting The Sun Back Into The Sunshine State: How Florida's Transition To Solar Power Has Brought The State Out Of The Shadows Cast By Big Oil's Energy-Monopoly, Christopher Berman

Environmental and Earth Law Journal (EELJ)

No abstract provided.

An Overview Of The Zika Virus Epidemic And What America Can Do To Prevent The Spread Of The Virus In The Future, Alexandra Parrish

Environmental and Earth Law Journal (EELJ)

No abstract provided.

Clean Power Plan, Janice Chon

Environmental and Earth Law Journal (EELJ)

No abstract provided.

It's All Downhill From Here: How The Nation's Dispute With Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Is Solved, Spencer H. Newman

Environmental and Earth Law Journal (EELJ)

What makes the United States one of the most prosperous and safest nations in the modern world? Perhaps it is the durable economy, the strong military force, or the Constitutional protections. What most Americans take for granted, however, is something people in many nations base their entire lives around: safe, clean water. Promulgated in 1972, the original Clean Water Act has been opposed and amended over the course of forty years. No provision, however, has been as hotly contested as the § 404 program for “dredge and fill” permits. Specifically, this section led to divisions on what constitutes “water” that …

Willful Blindness Or Deliberate Indifference: The United States' Abdication Of Legal Responsibility To Refugees, Abed A. Ayoub, Yolanda C. Rondon

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.

Pepperdine University School Of Law Legal Summaries, Jee (Jane) Seo

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

The Crushing Of A Dream: Daca, Dapa And The Politics Of Immigration Law Under President Obama, Robert H. Wood

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.

Who Put The Quo In Quid Pro Quo?: Why Courts Should Apply Mcdonnell ’S “Official Act” Definition Narrowly, Adam F. Minchew

Fordham Law Review

Federal prosecutors have several tools at their disposal to bring criminal charges against state and local officials for their engagement in corrupt activity. Section 666 federal funds bribery and § 1951 Hobbs Act extortion, two such statuary tools, have coexisted for the past thirty-six years, during which time § 666 has seen an increasing share of total prosecutions while the Hobbs Act’s share of prosecutions has fallen commensurately. In the summer of 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided McDonnell v. United States—a decision that threatens to quicken the demise of Hobbs Act extortion in favor of § 666. If …

Irreconcilable Similarities: The Inconsistent Analysis Of 212(C) And 212(H) Waivers, Kate Aschenbrenner Rodriguez

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Probabilistic Compliance, Alex Raskolnikov

Faculty Scholarship

Uncertain legal standards are pervasive but understudied. The key theoretical result showing an ambiguous relationship between legal uncertainty and optimal deterrence remains largely undeveloped, and no alternative conceptual approaches to the economic analysis of legal uncertainty have emerged. This Article offers such an alternative by shifting from the well-established and familiar optimal deterrence theory to the new and unfamiliar probabilistic compliance framework. This shift brings the analysis closer to the world of legal practice and yields new theoretical insights. Most importantly, lower uncertainty tends to lead to more compliant positions and greater private gains. In contrast, the market for legal …

Some Initial Thoughts On Wilson V. Atomic Energy Of Canada Ltd And Edmonton (City) V. Edmonton East (Capilano) Shopping Centres Ltd, Diana Ginn

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Administrative law focusses on the way in which, and the extent to which, courts should oversee the exercise of administrative authority. The law on substantive review of administrative decision-making has changed drastically over the last several decades, particularly around choice of standard of review. In the words of the Honorable John M Evans, courts have returned to this issue “with almost monotonous regularity over the last 30 years”. Two Supreme Court of Canada decisions from 2016, Wilson v Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd and Edmonton (City) v Edmonton East (Capilano) Shopping Centres Ltd, have regenerated discussion about standard of …

Short-Circuiting The New Major Questions Doctrine, Kent H. Barnett, Christopher J. Walker

Scholarly Works

In Minor Courts, Major Questions, Michael Coenen and Seth Davis advance perhaps the most provocative proposal to date to address the new major questions doctrine articulated in King v. Burwell. They argue that the Supreme Court alone should identify “major questions” that deprive agencies of interpretive primacy, prohibiting the doctrine’s use in the lower courts. Although we agree that the Court provided little guidance about the doctrine’s scope in King v. Burwell, we are unpersuaded that the solution to this lack of guidance is to limit its doctrinal development to one court that hears fewer than eighty cases per year. …